Why is sniffing a flower considered to be stealing?

According to the Gandhatthena Sutta (SN 9.14) , a monk sniffing a flower in the wilderness, that was not given to him, is considered stealing, even if it's only a hair-tip's worth of evil. Why is sniffing a flower in the wilderness considered to be stealing? Does that apply to lay followers too? > I have heard that on one occasion a certain monk was dwelling among > the Kosalans in a forest thicket. Now at that time, after his meal, > returning from his almsround, he went down to a lotus pond and sniffed > a red lotus. > > Then the devata inhabiting the forest thicket, feeling sympathy for > the monk, desiring his benefit, desiring to bring him to his senses, > approached him and addressed him with this verse: > > *[Devata:]* > **You sniff this water-born flower > that hasn't been given to you. > This, dear sir, is a factor of stealing. > You are a thief of a scent.** > > *[The monk:]* > I don't take, don't damage. > I sniff at the lotus > from far away. > So why do you call me > a thief of a scent? > > One who > digs up the stalks, > damages flowers, > one of such ruthless behavior: > why don't you say it of him? > > *[The devata:]* > A person ruthless & grasping, > smeared like a nursing diaper: > to him > I have nothing to say. > It's you > to whom I should speak. > > To a person unblemished, > constantly searching for purity, > **a hair-tip's worth of evil** > seems as large > as a cloud. > > *[The monk:]* > Yes, yakkha, you understand me > and show me sympathy. > Warn me again, yakkha, > whenever again > you see something like this. > > *[The devata:]* > I don't depend on you > for my living > nor am I > your hired hand. > You, monk, > you yourself should know > how to go to the good destination. > > The monk, chastened by the devata, came to his senses.